international social science council/conseil international des sciences sociales
Comparative Research Programme on Poverty
CROP Secretariat
Nygårdsgt. 5 Tel: +47 55 58 97 39 N-5020 Bergen Fax +47 55 58 97 45
NORWAY E-mail: [email protected]
THE POLYSCOPIC LANDSCAPE OF POVERTY RESEARCH
“State of the art” in International Poverty Research.
An overview and 6 in-depth studies
Report prepared for
the Research Council of Norway
by
Else Øyen in collaboration with
Bård Anders Andreassen, Asbjørn Eide, Anete Brito Leal Ivo, Nanna Kildal, Kassim Kulindwa, Enrique Valencia Lomelí, Jarichje Moeshart, Carlos Barba Solano, Kirsti Thesen Sælen, Lucy Williams, Francis Wilson, Alicia
Ziccardi
Bergen, Norway, April 2005
THE POLYSCOPIC LANDSCAPE OF POVERTY RESEARCH
CONTENTS
Chapter Page
Preface 1 I Introduction
Else Øyen
2
II The Polyscopic Landscape of Poverty Research
1. Disciplinary Approaches 2. Approaches by Other Actors
3. Examples of Dominant Approaches in Poverty Research 4. Institutions Involved in Different Forms of Poverty Research
Else Øyen
5
III Methodological Issues of Importance to Further the Scientific Development of Poverty Research
1. Conceptual Changes
2. Poverty Reduction as a Goal for Poverty Research 3. Ethical Issues in Poverty Research
4. Poverty Research as a Long-term Project
Else Øyen
24
IV Research Horizons: Poverty in Latin America
1. Introduction
2. Studies during the Eighties: From Crisis to Adjustment 3. Structuring a Residual Welfare Paradigm
4. Studies under the Residual Paradigm 5. Opening of the Multiparadigmatic Phase 6. Towards a New Generation of Studies
Carlos Barba Solano, Anete Brito Leal Ivo, Enrique Valencia Lomelí, and Alicia Ziccardi
29
V Poverty in South Africa: 2000-2005
1. Historical Context 2. The Past Five Years 3. The Wider Region 4. Conclusion
Francis Wilson
61
VI Poverty and Water: How Water Distribution and Allocation Is Institutionalised within a Framework of Access and Denial
1. Introduction: Link between water and poverty 2. Role of water to society
3. Poverty – Water Research in the Past Decade 4. Water-Poverty Measurement Considerations
5. The Quest for Improved Availability of Water for the Poor 6. Stakeholder Participation
7. Economic Approaches 8. Water for Irrigation
9. The Current Focus on the Environment, Water – Poverty Nexus 10. The Need for Strengthening the Poverty-Water Linkage 11. Challenges for Future Research
71
VII Law and Poverty
1. Introduction
2. Law as Partially Constructing and Perpetuating Poverty 3. Social Welfare Laws Construct Identities and Exclusions
4. Legally Enforceable Individual Entitlements to Socio-Economic Rights 5. The Relevance of Multiple Legal Regimes to Poverty Reduction 6. Viewing Poverty Reduction through a Cross-Border Lens 7. Conclusion
Lucy A. Williams
91
VIII Human Rights as an International Poverty Reducing Strategy
1. The New Emphasis on Human Rights in International Poverty Reduction Work 2. Conceptual and Operational Linkage between Human Rights and Development in
International Human Rights Law
3. The Relationship between Human Rights and Poverty Established by Human Rights Institutions and in the Literature
4. Key Research Challenges
Bård Anders Andreassen and Asbjørn Eide
110
IX Poverty and the Rights of Citizenship
1. Introduction
2. Three Principles of Welfare: Universalism, Targeting and Contribution 3. Scandinavian Universalism and Poverty Reduction
4. Old-age Pensions and Poverty in ‘Developing Countries’
5. A Universal Basic Income Grant (BIG)
6. Factors Conducive to Scandinavian Universalism 7. Open Questions
Nanna Kildal
121
X Agenda for Future Research on Poverty in the South
1. General Recommendations 2. Specific Recommendations 3. Poverty Production
Else Øyen
135
XI The Extent of Norwegian Expertise and the Role of Norwegian Scholars in Research on Poverty in the South
1. Data on Norwegian Research on Poverty in the South
2. The Framework of Norwegian Poverty Research Directed towards the South 3. The Role of Norwegian Scholars in International Poverty Research
Kirsti Thesen Sælen
141
Appendix
A Overview of Institutions Involved in Poverty Research Jarichje Moeshart
B Resource Persons C About the Authors D About CROP E Acronyms
Preface
In August 2004 the Research Council of Norway announced tenders for a “State-of-the-art”
report within international poverty research, with special focus on institutions and rights. The Research Council wanted the report to give an overview over what is the present state of knowledge in the field, indicate where the frontiers of research are, identify what the most pressing needs for new knowledge are, and suggest how Norwegian expertise can contribute to poverty research in the South. The size of the report is limited to 100 pages.
The Comparative Research Programme on Poverty (CROP) was successful with its tender. The contract (Project No. 168080/S30) with the Research Council was signed by both parties during the second half of October 2004, and the contract period was set to 4 months.
The final report was to be delivered 1.05.2005 at the latest.
The project description provided by CROP for the tender competition takes as its starting point that, within the framework of such a report, it is at present not possible to give more than a limited overview of the frontiers of international poverty research. Poverty research comprises a vast area of different scientific disciplines and interdisciplinary approaches, within clearly opposing paradigms. No common platform has been established for the scientific evaluation of the field in general, and the validity of presented research results is often difficult to judge as some of the research is mixed with political interests and/or particular moral values.
In this situation CROPs proposal was to use its own knowledge base to
1) give an overview of where a selection of major approaches to poverty research are presently located in the field of international science and present some of the current paradigmatic approaches, and
2) single out five topics for in-depth case studies to present frontiers of research within different areas of international poverty research and define new questions to be explored, and
3) use this material to say something about what are the most pressing needs for new knowledge in international poverty research and how this may be reflected in future studies in the South.
The project is designed to meet the requirements of the Research Council which is to focus on institutions and rights and contribute to knowledge development of special importance for poverty reduction and national welfare strategies in the South.
CROP hereby presents the Report from the project. It has been developed in close co- operation with scholars in the South and other members of the CROP international network of poverty researchers, see Appendix B. Very special thanks go to the main collaborators who have taken charge of the case studies. The results of their work appear in chapters IV-IX.
CROP, however, bears the sole responsibility for the contents of the Report.
Else Øyen, Scientific Director of CROP1 Bergen, 30.04.2005
1 The CROP Secretariat is located at the University of Bergen, Norway. For more information about CROP see www.crop.org
I
Introduction
Else Øyen
The challenge of this Report is to point to some of the major trends in poverty research and to identify promising research results that might form a useful base for further research on causes, processes and formations of poverty in the South. Such an overview is one of several tools needed to improve poverty research.
The Report has not been easy to write. It would be easier to write a report on the-state- of-the-art in non-poverty research. The non-poor are fewer in number, more visible, better and more adequately researched, and as a group likely to be more homogenous than the poor.
Still, nobody would ever expect such a report to be complete and satisfactory.
One of the problems with a report on the-state-of-the-art in poverty research lies with the concept of poverty. Poverty is an umbrella concept embracing the future, past and present lives of millions and millions of people. It is a concept developed by the non-poor. Its generality serves to create distance and avoid individualising. As a specific research tool it is of little use. However, it is being used in research and political action, and somehow or other we therefore have to relate to it.
Some of the major factors that have an impact on a report on the-state-of-the-art on poverty research can be listed as follows:
• Poverty is an extremely complex phenomenon that can not be described or understood through a limited set of variables or a fixed context.
• Causes and manifestations of poverty are found on the micro, meso and macro level in a huge diversity of cultural settings.
• The present overall picture of poverty research is a conglomerate of basic and applied research of varying quality, political statements and moral beliefs that at times are used interchangeably.
• Research has tried to find its way through this mass of complexity by sorting out certain variables for inspection, follow a limited set of causal factors and concentrate on certain strategies for poverty reduction. As a result research reports, however scientific and thorough their approaches, can only present a limited and skewed picture of reality. These factors influence a presentation of the state of the art.
• During the last decade or so research on poverty and research induced poverty papers and reports on poverty issues that present partial research results have increased at such a rate that it is not possible to give a full overview.1 The picture is such that the frontiers of all this activity stretch out in many different and incoherent directions. While this can be considered a bonus for a blossoming field of research that has not yet found its foci, it is a drawback for those who expect a well drawn up frontier of research.
• There is no logical guide through this mass of information and what should be given priority in a limited report on the state-of-the-art in poverty research.
• Poverty reduction covers a very large arsenal of strategies directed at poverty phenomena, based on verified and assumed causes. Research on poverty reduction has become such a vital part of poverty research that it is at times difficult to distinguish analytically between the two.
The Report consists of four parts. The first is a layout of what can be called the polyscopic landscape of poverty research. It outlines the directions that some of the major actors in poverty research have taken and points to some of the current trends in poverty research. The second part is a discussion of methodological issues involved in poverty research that need to be clarified if poverty research is to move ahead. In themselves these issues are important researchable topics. The third part consists of a set of 6 in-depth studies where the more precise frontiers of research are elucidated in relation to specific arenas where poverty formation plays an important role. The studies purport to show 6 different approaches to poverty. Two of the studies are regional, and a third is narrowed down topically. A fourth study is set within one of the disciplines; the following study is based on an international move to eradicate poverty, and the last concerns poverty as seen from a Scandinavian angle.
Six different approaches with six very different theoretical frameworks and analytical tools have as their common denominator a scientific approach to poverty that can provide new understanding.
The first study is on poverty research in Latin America which is distinctly different from poverty research elsewhere. Latin America has the largest economic disparities between people anywhere in the world and a framework of inequality dominates poverty understanding. Studies are abundant and the literature is rich. The chapter describes dominant themes of social policy and poverty studies during the 1980’s, and characterizes the hegemonic regional welfare paradigms developed during the 1990’s. At the end the authors present the emergence of new perspectives that point toward the construction of an alternative paradigm. Theoretical and methodological questions are raised, and research tendencies related to the understanding of poverty in a Latin American context receive particular attention. This is the first attempt to write a comprehensive state-of–the-art paper on the frontiers of poverty research in Latin America.
The second study sets poverty research in a historical context and shows how the special political regime of apartheid in South Africa impacted on poverty research. The early ties between bureaucracy and the academic community marked by control have continued but now as fruitful co-operation producers and users of poverty research.
The third study moves straight into one of the current and well researched discussions on the relationship between water for productive and reproductive purposes and poverty. This is one of the areas where frontiers of poverty research can be identified clearly.
The fourth study is set within a non-poor country (although a large part of its population live in poverty). The examples used are national but some of the principles used in the legal language are universal and have an impact on poverty formation wherever they are put to use. Legal discourses define people in and out of categories, seemingly neutral but often without the necessary understanding of the more subtle discriminatory consequences of these actions.
The fifth study looks at the conceptual and operational linkage between human rights and poverty reduction world wide. The different rights and their roots, intentions, interrelationships and likely future development are discussed.
The sixth study examines different social policy principles and programmes that have shown to be effective in reducing inequality and poverty in mature welfare states. By focusing on Scandinavian experiences and the non-contributory, universal transfer systems, the question is raised as to whether the success of these principles for poverty reduction can be effective and feasible also in countries in the South. Various contextual preconditions for universal social policies are considered within this framework.
The last part of the Report discusses poverty reduction as a goal for poverty research and provides inputs to a future agenda for poverty research. Included is a discussion on the potential for the involvement of Norwegian expertise in further research on poverty in the South. Appendix A provides an overview of institutions working with poverty research and related research.
CROP chose a different focus for its first project on the state-of-the-art in poverty research (Øyen, Miller and Samad 1996). In the first half of the 90’s groups of social scientists from different regions world-wide were invited to write on where the frontiers of poverty were at the time. They were asked what kinds of research questions were raised, what kind of methodologies, concepts and theories were used in their regions, and where the likely trends in poverty research was headed. In spite of communication difficulties it was still possible to make a reasonably fair presentation of poverty research. In spite of the proliferation of poverty studies since then it is still possible to use the same procedure. This is made possible by increased facilitation of communication and an increasing number of experts who know the field well. Within the present Report certain choices had to be made and a lower level of ambition instilled. If every one of the actors mentioned in the following chapter on the polyscopic landscape of poverty research were to be treated fairly in a state-of- the-art publication, the character of this Report would have been quite different.
Reference
Else Øyen, S.M.Miller and Syed Abdus Samad (eds.) (1996) Poverty: A Global Review.
Handbook in International Poverty Research, Oslo and Paris: Scandinavian University Press and UNESCO.
Note
1 A search in Questia Online Library gave 74561 hits on poverty, out of which 37890 were books and 16187 were journal articles.
II
The Polyscopic Landscape of Poverty Research
Else
Øyen
The understanding of poverty is in the eyes of the beholder. Different actors see different things, emphasize different aspects and develop different paradigms of poverty understanding according to their discipline, position or vested interests. A researcher tries to gather as much relevant information as possible and to see the actual research question from as many angles as possible. When information becomes overwhelming and relevance takes on still new meanings, the researcher finds himself/herself in a polyscopic landscape.1 Poverty research and semi-research mixed with political and moral interpretations, provides the perfect example of a polyscopic landscape.
The overview below describes some of the directions different approaches to poverty have taken. The emphasis is on poverty research undertaken in the South and on the kind of poverty research outside the South which is likely to have had an impact on poverty research in the South.2
1. Disciplinary Approaches
Many of the disciplines within the social sciences and several outside the social sciences have incorporated poverty as a research topic, some of them fairly recently and some through a well established tradition. As could be expected, the disciplinary approaches to poverty understanding are coloured by the discipline’s theories, methodologies and previous research. The understanding of poverty is fitted into the dominant paradigms of the discipline.3 It follows from this that the frontiers of poverty research follow closely the state- of-the-art within the discipline in question. So far there have been few successful attempts to integrate different disciplinary approaches in a theoretical and coherent manner.
Figure 1 visualises some of the most important disciplines in the landscape of poverty research.
The disciplines with the longest tradition in the study of poverty are economics and sociology, and to a certain degree also demography and agricultural science. As a result paradigms from these disciplines have been dominating in academic and political understanding during the last 3-4 decades. Key words like “economic growth”, “capitalistic exploitation”, “population control” and “the green revolution” are indicators of significant paradigms that spell out in detail causes and consequences of poverty.
Economics is about the distribution of material resources and the effects of different distributions. The poor are by definition at the lower end of the distribution curves and this
“default” has received much attention in the discipline. Within economic models it becomes important to calculate the size of the problem, and effort is invested in measuring poverty in different ways and in analyzing the conditions under which changes occur. Hereunder, also extensive research on the effects of different thresholds for subsidies to the poor. The notion of poverty reduction plays an indirect role when research is focussed on employment opportunities for the poor, access to the market, and microcredit schemes as a means to increase individual and household resources. Questions are raised as to whether the very poorest are able to profit from these measures and generate an income. Concepts like human capital, capabilities and social capital (see below) represent a widening of the more traditional economic definition of poverty. Development economics is a major approach within the discipline and the early days of the crude “trickle down” effect have been supplemented by the impact of social variables. For example, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has made poverty reduction an overarching goal. The ADB publication on “The New Social Policy in Asia” (in partnership with the World Bank) is a blueprint for which contexts and variables to take into account to achieve this goal. The economic understanding of causes and remedies of poverty dominates the many case studies. Issues such as the impact of local culture, processes of exclusion, gender, civil society, citizenship and public consent are treated partly as issues
POVERTY
Geography Public Admini-
stration Sociology
Anthropology Political Science
Medicine Psychology History
Philosophy Law
Economics
Demography Agricultural
Sciences
FIGURE 1: MAJOR DISCIPLINARY ACTORS IN THE LANDSCAPE OF POVERTY
directly linked to poverty reduction, partly as a function of economic issues related to poverty reduction (2000). Critical voices have been raised in particular to economic growth as a major vehicle for poverty reduction and the assumption that more growth translates into increased poverty reduction. Growth is related to inequity and equity is related to poverty reduction, and those relationships do not necessarily work in favour of the poor (Vandemoortele 2002; see also Chapter IV). Microcredit which has been launched as one of the most promising poverty reducing schemes is also under heavy critizism. It tends to reach the “better off” poor rather than the vast majority of poor households, and it does not necessarily offer the most desirable financial products (Morduch, 1999). Kanbur has written on the explicit and implicit disagreements in economic approaches to poverty reduction strategies and has put forward a categorization of persons involved in the dispute. One divide is found between those at the more academic end of the spectrum and those at the policy end of the spectrum (2001).
Another divide is between conservative and radical economists, a divide which is also found throughout all the other social sciences in their analysis of poverty.
Sociology is the discipline most closely associated with social problems and numerous qualitative and quantitative studies of deprivation, marginalisation, exclusion, the life of the underclass, inequality, skewed distribution of resources, and the like flourish on the micro as well as the meso and macro level. Within the Nordic welfare states the national level of living studies became influential (see below) and large-scale research programmes on different aspects of the welfare state and deprived populations have dominated the research agenda (Chapter IX). The notion of citizenship and the inclusion of all citizens in the society, also the poor, was brought to the fore by Marshall, (1950; 1964) and became a cornerstone of modern poverty research. Studies comparing quality and extent of citizenship, where one criteria is the rights of the poor, have followed up on this. A comparison between citizenship in Europe and the United States focuses on “new poverty” (Lawson and Wilson, 1995), while UNDP developed indicators built on the same framework to make mass poverty in the South visible (see below).
Administrative sciences have a traditional close affiliation with the bureaucracy and much of the research is carried out for the benefit of the administration. In poverty research, as well as in social administration and social policy research, a major focus has been on efficient delivery of services, evaluation research and the role of the professions in poverty reducing activities (Chambers, 1997). Britain has the longest tradition for this kind of poverty research.
Important contributions from psychology come from research on coping strategies and detailed descriptions of what a life in poverty and deprivation means to the individual and his/her internal and external relations (Narayan, 2000). Coping is an umbrella concept for a wide variety of strategies to meet sudden and unexpected poverty. As for example the way small farmers tackle unexpected and crippling drought and the way slum-dwellers behave living with a permanent poverty that calls for both daily challenges of survival and flexibility when new opportunities arise. The concept caught extra attention when sudden changes in the former Soviet economy created mass poverty among the former middle class that was forced to develop coping strategies not considered previously (Lokshin and Yemtsov, 2001). Most of the coping strategies are contextual and situational, but some are also almost universal in character. As for example the reluctance of poor and marginalised people to get involved in institutions created by the non-poor, such as the bureaucracy, police and courts (Narayan, 2000).
In the past political science has been remarkably absent from poverty research. With the recent emphasis on poverty internationally and nationally, political scientists have entered the field, too. Studies of mass movements, civil society and democracy formation (Good,
2001; Kerapeletswe and Moremi, 2001) are now directed towards the poor. Studies of the development of national and international actions for poverty reducing interventions have become part of the research agenda (Kanji, 2001; May, 2001). A group within CROP has worked on a project on “The Role of the State in Poverty Reduction” and analysed the potential and boundaries of state responsibilities for citizens living in poverty. The first study analysed Southern and Central African states (Wilson, Kanji and Braathen, 2001). The second study focuses on Latin American states (Cimadamore, Dean and Siqueira 2005 forthcoming), (see also Chapter IV). A recent study on famine tests the theoretical concepts developed by Amartya Sen on entitlement, capability and public action on an empirical study on poverty, drought and malnutrition in an Indian state. The role of the bureaucracy and the politicians responsible for drought relief is analysed (Banik, 2002). Welfare state research is central in political science, increasingly so with comparative studies. Although poverty does not feature prominently, political institutions and policies designed to increase welfare for sections of the population or the entire population, do incorporate poor people (Kuhnle, Kwon, Selle and Prakash, 2003).
Law has taken human rights to its heart, partly as a follow-up of developments in international fora which emphasize human rights. Part of the research agenda links human rights to individual poverty reduction (see Chapter VIII). A group within CROP has worked on the project “Law and Poverty” during the last 7 years analysing how poverty is treated within different legal systems and how poverty does, or does not, influence poverty formation and poverty reducing strategies (Kjønstad and Veit-Wilson, 1997; Kjønstad and Robson, 2001;
Van Genugten and Perez-Bustillo, 2001; Williams, Kjønstad and Robson, 2003; Williams 2005 forthcoming) (see also Chapter VII).
It can be argued that anthropology has studied poor people throughout the life of the discipline, as for example through research on production systems, management of natural resources and land tenure. Here marginalised people as well as people in control of resources come to the fore as actors in the system. More often theories within anthropology are tried out in the studies and only part of the research is linked directly to the understanding of poverty formation. Qualitative research embedded in anthropological methodology provides unique insights into the lives of poor people, and local in-depth studies supply the cultural contexts in which poverty is formed. Indigenous knowledge as a necessary precondition for understanding poor people is stressed by both anthropologists and social scientists living in the cultures and slums where research is being undertaken (Mammo, 1999). However, the many small regional studies pertaining to poverty have not been brought together to form a more coherent larger picture of the processes of poverty formation, and how the empirical variations in cultural contexts in which poverty is found can be brought to bear on a fuller understanding of poverty. The best known example on poverty directed anthropological research is probably the tradition created by the Mexican Oscar Lewis and his “Culture of poverty” (1966) who argued that poverty was transferred from generation to generation as
“common adaptations to common problems”. In good academic tradition this was first considered a break-through in poverty research and then heavily criticised. Criticism was partly due to the passive role allocated to the poor, partly due to the still more fluid spatial borders in which culture is being transferred. The concept became part of the political battle between political right- and left-wingers in their struggle to define poverty and shape the public image of the poor (McNeish, unpublished manuscript). Later the notion of a culture of poverty was brought back in a reformulated version where the poor are seen as active and creative in their adaptations to daily hardships (Chambers, 1997). Race and ethnicity play a significant role in anthropology (Eversole, McNeish and Cimadamore, 2005), and recent anthropology has made the link also to human rights through “cultural rights” (see Chapter
VIII).
The medical profession has the longest tradition for involvement with poor people and research on the improvement of their health, but the emphasis has not been on more broad- based research linked to poverty. Poverty as a cause of ill health has been taken for granted and the different constituents of poverty have seldom been brought into the picture in the clarification of causal links (see also WHO below). Poverty is defined per se as some kind of illness, a mortality rate, or a need that can be satisfied with medical input. In a recent report (Global Health Research, 2004) it states that global health research is an important tool to
“fight poverty” and “Research that reduces the burden of poverty-related health problems --- should therefore have priority”. To reach this goal only indirect notions of poverty are outlined, such as the need to construct the delivery of health care with measures of “equity, accessibility and affordability” and “trustworthiness” (p.17; see also Lancet 2003). The poor in general need a health care with these characteristics more than the remainder of the population. Such a model can also be considered as part of a desirable standard health service.
History has provided detailed case histories on poverty formation over time, on the national as well as the local and individual level. The major problem is of course that data about poor people in general is scarce, and even more so in the South where written sources from the past are the exception. This is demonstrated in Iliffe’s classical analysis ”The African Poor” (1987) where poverty and the lives of poor people are described in several countries. All available sources are explored and led to new insight and new questions asked.
At the same time, some of the issues raised were alien to African cultures because they were framed within a European context. In particular, the interpretation of poverty was seen with British eyes and lack of commodities in African villages was perceived as a sign of severe deprivation and an indicator of mass poverty. This situation of paralleling dissimilar phenomena is not uncommon when researchers from the North carry out research in the South. As colonialism subsided the crop of indigenous historians has grown and the African past is being reconstructed. Studies have flourished during the last couple of decades, some within the established historical tradition, others within a more open orientation where room is also given to social sciences and the humanities (Zewde, 2003).
Each of the different disciplinary approaches has its own understanding of poverty.
They have formed their specific bonds of theory, methodology and past experience between their discipline and the poverty phenomena. Poverty is only one of many other topics being studied. To the extent it is being studied it is not necessarily poverty as such that is being studied. It is more the use of the different tools of the discipline that are being tested out.
Actually, it can be argued that any theory from Nietzsche to Foucault can be used to analyse one or another aspect of poverty. The poverty phenomenon is so complex and comprehensive and covers so many dimensions of human and social behaviour that almost any theory relating to human beings can add to a fragment of poverty understanding.
As with all kinds of analysis of poverty, disciplinary or not, the picture is incomplete.
Only fragments are presented. If a more complete picture is to emerge some of the disciplinary bonding needs to be loosened and new links established. That is a research challenge in itself.
Two important publications on famine can exemplify the dilemma. They appeared at almost the same time. The historian Iliffe writes on famine in Zimbabwe (1990) while the economists Dréze and Sen write on famine in India (1989). Both publications are written in what could be termed the traditions of their disciplines. Imagine the kind of comparative research three such eminent scholars could have produced if their academic resources had been pooled.
One example of multi-disciplinary co-operation might show the way forward. The hitherto so dominant paradigm in agricultural science of “green revolution” was for a couple of decades seen as a major poverty reducing mechanism. Since then it has been questioned and reformulated several times. One study showed that the carbohydrate-rich plants of the green revolution resulted in dramatically lower iron density and anemia among poor women due to the lack of zinc and micronutrients in traditional plants (Ross Welch, Proceedings 2004). The former focus on a few high-yielding energy rich plants has now been shifted to a manifold of local plants containing minerals and micronutrients that benefit small farming and poor people with deficiency diseases. Here medical knowledge has been twinned with knowledge about agriculture, local culture and rural poverty formation. The project has closed some of the knowledge gaps in the nutrition chain from geology to intake of food and poverty reduction. Next step towards further poverty reduction contains at least three kind of strategies directed at small scale farmers and some of the 3 billion people who suffer from the effects of micronutrient deficiencies. Transfer and translation of scientific knowledge about production processes that at the onset are very complicated into practical knowledge to inform people who might not be able to read or change traditional practices. Access provided to simple technology that will help in the adaptation process of new knowledge. Development of new plants that will increase further the nutritional value for poor people who have no other nutritional options (Hans Peter Andersen, Proceedings 2004). Others might add to those strategies an economic analysis of the market for the local plants to see how income can be generated to overcome more than immediate hunger and malnutrition among small farmers.
2. Approaches by Other Actors
There are many other actors in the poverty landscape besides those found in these and other disciplines. Some are producing basic research full time, others are producing applied research stemming from basic research, while still others are using research results in new constellations that bring forward interesting additional knowledge. Some of this activity is performed according to normal scientific criteria, while some of what is presented as research is infected with political and moral views and/or based on incomplete or even faulty data. It seems that there is more of the latter than of the former. If unacceptable research is to be sorted out from acceptable research every study and report needs to be scrutinised. Since the numbers of studies and “studies” internationally have increased enormously during the last decade, this task is not possible within the given limits.
Figure 2 provides an overview of some of the central actors with an impact on poverty understanding, although poverty formation and poverty reduction may not be at the core of their activity. They are roughly and arbitrarily divided in two with research institutions on one side and other important actors on the other side. However, an actor as for example the World Bank has a dual role. It produces some high quality studies on poverty but its primary role is not that of a research institution. While UNRISD might well be placed among the research institutions.
As discussed elsewhere development research is not synonymous with poverty research (Øyen, 2002a). Development research is a much broader field where poverty formation and poverty reduction may or may not be considered directly. Some of the research
FIGURE 2:
SOME ACTORS WITH RESEARCH BASED ACTIVITY IN THE LANDSCAPE OF POVERTY
POVERTY
Poverty/Development Research Institutes
Think tanks
University departments
Individual researchers
UN
as for example UNDP
UNEP UNESCO UNICEF UNFPA UNITAR UNRISD FAO ILO
INSTRAW WHO
ECOSOC with Regional commission World Bank/ Reg- ional banks etc.
EU/OECD and ot-her regional org.
National Poverty Reports etc.
Donors and Foreign Aid
The Church
NGO's
Consultants
taking place in university departments and research institutes that traditionally were turned towards development research can be defined as poverty research. The tendency has been that direct poverty related research has moved up on the agenda in the last few years (see below and Appendix A). University departments and research institutes do basic and applied research (although the distinction is not always easy to make) and consultancies take up a still larger part of their portfolio. This implies that external demands set the agenda for the directions of research, and problematic poverty issues as perceived by the administration, politicians, public opinion or dominant discourses indirectly decide current frontiers of research. Also, it implies that short term contracts shift the research agenda faster than a basic research agenda does.
The major part of the university departments and research institutions are located in the North and the major part of resources and scholars on the poverty arena are located in the North (see Appendix A). Therefore, it is not surprising to note that an overwhelming part of the total amount of research is directed towards poverty in the North. Likewise, it may not be surprising that many Northern scholars and other actors on the poverty arena, when doing research in the South tend to bring along their own concepts and term their hypotheses and results within a Northern framework.
Some research institutions are firmly based within one of the disciplines. But many are, if not inter-disciplinary, then multi-disciplinary, embracing economists, political scientists, anthropologists and sociologists under one roof, sometimes adding the odd historian or philosopher. Other research institutions are directly problem-oriented, in particular those located in those parts of the South where tertiary education is problem- oriented rather than strictly organised within disciplines.
The entire UN system and the World Bank have put poverty reduction, (or even poverty eradication, cf. the UN Social Summit, Copenhagen 1995), high on their agenda and different UN agencies initiate basic and applied research within their own systems as well as outside their systems. All this activity has an impact on how poverty is viewed and how poverty should be reduced.
More than any other actors UNDP and the World Bank have influenced the poverty research agenda world-wide, through their yearly reports and extensive lobbying (Human Development Reports 1990-2004; World Development Reports 1978-2004).
FAO has put its mark on rural poverty research pointing to the structural differences between rural and urban poverty and the need to create different research agendas and different strategies for poverty reduction among the rural poor as compared to those forwarded for the poor in the city slums (Rural Poverty Report, 2001).
UNICEF has its own research centre which has produced a rich literature on the conditions of children deprived of care, nutrition, rights etc., the latest being a study on poor children in rich countries (Innocenti Report Cards, 1989-2005, UNICEF; and Child poverty in rich countries, Innocenti Report Cards, 6:2005, UNICEF).
UNESCO has a programme on human rights and poverty based on a mixture of basic research and action research (see Chapter VIII). The organisation is a major mover on research on primary education in the South with particular emphasis on poor children.
The focus of ILO is on labour conditions and the need to enforce labour legislation and the protection and rights of workers worldwide. ILO has its own research facilities (International Institute for Labour Studies; ILO Bureau of Statistics). Research on those marginalised from the labour market or working under intolerable conditions is one important dimension in ILOs research on poverty (Ferge, Tausz and Darvas, 2002).
WHO has developed important research tools such as a searchable data base containing all its publications back to 1985 (WHOLIS) and a statistical package on medical information worldwide (WHOSIS). A tentative search provides more than five hundred hits on poverty but the poverty definitions seem to be fairly rudimentary. They do not match the sophisticated medical definitions of health. WHO has taken major action on diseases such as tuberculosis and malaria which are typical poverty related diseases and integrated in mass poverty. WHO is pushing for health issues such as HIV/AIDS and epidemic diseases in the South to become integrated into the poverty research agenda. Those initiatives are partly based on WHO research or external research, partly on political goals as to what needs to be done.
CEPAL plays a major role in poverty research in Latin America and the Caribbean (see also Chapter IV). Long-term series of statistics on different aspects of living conditions in the countries of the continent are compiled (Statistical Yearbook for Latin America and the Caribbean 2004 and previous years) and used among other things to analyse changes in income distribution and poverty over time. The impact of national policies and external forces on poverty formation are described and commented. Growth projections are provided and, as part of a recent trend, a cautious prediction is made that the MDG goals may be reached by 2015 (Social Panorama of Latin America 2004).
Although 57 million people in the EU live below the official poverty level, the term poverty is not a central concept used on the EU research agenda. Preference is given to the term ‘exclusion’, a term that embraces all kinds of marginalisation, including the poor, and to welfare and social policy within the EU (Gallie, 2004). An exception is a major EU program on ‘life science, genomics and biotechnology’ which outlines a research strategy to combat poverty related diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis (European Commission - Research: The Sixth Framework Programme (2002-2006)).
The main objective of the OECD is to cater to the economic and social interests of its members. Those interests also include a keen eye on the development of poverty and related issues in the South and have resulted in statistical data of high quality and research reports.
OECD has made a research tool available online and searchable of this material including related material from other sources (SourceOECD). OECD made an attempt to unite its members into a joint programme for poverty reducing strategies in the South, including research. Concerted efforts in policies and financing in order to strengthen and co-ordinate aid was the major goal to meet the criticism of fragmented aid, parallel targeting and increased burden of reporting for the recipients (DAC Guidelines for Poverty Reduction 2000). The push for more formal co-ordination was only partially successful, but it might have helped increase informal co-operation among the donors. Traces of the DAC influence can be seen in the use of the OECD/DACs checklist for “Policy Coherence for Poverty Reduction” in several national poverty reports, including the Norwegian poverty reducing plan for the South where it appears as an appendix (Regjeringens handlingsplan for bekjempelse av fattigdom i sør mot 2015, 2002).
National poverty reports or plan-of-actions for poverty reduction are in progress or being initiated in many countries. In the North it means that donor countries make plans for what they believe are the major poverty problems in the South and how they should be reduced. In the South the national reports analyse their internal poverty problems and set priorities for poverty reducing strategies and how they should be implemented. Some of this activity is research based, most is not. (See also comments on PRSP below).
The Norwegian plan-of-action “Fight against poverty” is ambitious and all-embracing (2002). Poverty is defined widely and poverty reducing strategies cover a wide array of
measures from direct aid to trade policy, anti-corruption, good governance, human rights, democracy, economic growth, environmental concerns, new alliances, etc. The vocabulary of the World Bank and OECD can be seen throughout and the attainment of the MDGs have a prominent place. No attempt to prioritise is put forward. In the text the document is presented as a framework rather than a plan-of-action. The 16 most important causes of poverty are listed (p.16). Roughly classified, 13 of these causes are internal, that is, nestled in the poor countries, while 3 are external and due to outside forces. It is difficult to assess how much of the document is research based. Traditionally there are close ties between research institutions and ministries in Norway and information flows easily between bureaucrats and researchers.
Studies and research results appear in the document without references, in short versions and used as illustrations of political aims. On the one hand, it adds to the broad-based approach to poverty and a visionary thinking that is lacking in most other national poverty reports outlining poverty reducing strategies. On the other hand, the level of precision forfeits the usefulness of research in outlining efficient poverty reduction. The need for research is mentioned in two sentences only (p.16 and p.58).
A wide spectrum of NGOs produce research or solicit research of relevance for their particular field of interest, as for example Oxfam and CARE, while other NGOs use research results of relevance for their aims and thereby disseminate research and influence discourses on poverty.
The Church has an important role in this landscape, both in discourses on morals and values and on for example research on the extent and depth of poverty not only in the South but also in the North.
A massive number of consultants work for organisations like the many actors mentioned above, and pour out reports of varying quality that are often treated as bona fide research. Not all those organisations have in-house research expertise to judge the quality of the work of the consultants. Therefore, recommendations for poverty reducing strategies from the consultants are in cases implemented uncritically.
3. Examples of Dominant Approaches in Poverty Research
Some research paradigms have a merit in themselves as structures on which to link researchable topics and develop new questions that push the understanding further. They come to the fore through their intellectual strength and coherence. Other paradigms become dominant in the sense that they influence research because their promoters manage to gain visibility and political influence. That does not mean they provide the best theoretical frameworks for research. Still, they inspire research due to their high profile and on their edges are found a prolific research literature.
Poverty research has not seen dramatic paradigmatic changes where new discovery suddenly brings about new insights and shifts the focus. Rather, it can be said that much of the research and semi-research carried out by the many actors in the landscape of poverty has found its focus only in the sense, that certain ideas or disciplinary paradigms or financial carrots point out the direction. Indirectly a mental co-ordination is taking place. In the fuzzy field of poverty understanding some actors are pushing their paradigms harder than others, and some paradigms fall in more fertile soil than others. Poverty research lies in a political minefield and choice of paradigm carries political implications as well as financial and professional rewards.
There are probably few research arenas that are so influenced by ‘external’ demands as poverty research. Choice of research interests are influenced by political events, attention
created by mass movements, new drives for social change, wars and natural catastrophies.
The public attention shifts and new research initiatives are created in the wake of the public eye.
The World Bank paradigm of economic growth as a major poverty reducing strategy has dominated research as well as the policies of political actors in the North and the South (see for example Regjeringens handlingsplan for bekjempelse av fattigdom i sør mot 2019, 2002; OECD DAC Guidelines on Poverty Reduction, 2000). The paradigm has spurred massive research in favour of the paradigm and the development of tools needed to sustain the paradigm. The most visible example is the extensive research on how to count the number of extreme poor in the poor part of the world. Numbers are needed to prove the thesis and a sizeable part of current research energy is invested in different measures for counting the poor and comparing numbers. But the paradigm with its different versions and offshoots has spurred also research questioning its efficiency as a poverty reducing strategy and the quality of its poverty definitions. The more critical kind of research is on the increase and, as it seems, the increase has come in particular in those parts of the world where the World Bank policies have been implemented (see Chapter IV). Criticisms are voiced also within the economic discipline and adjacent territory (Kanbur, 2001). The World Bank paradigm, both in its original and extended form (Attacking Poverty 2000-2001), is probably the most dominant in poverty research today, not necessarily due to its explanatory strength but rather to the prevailing political position of the Bank. The introduction of the PRSPs (Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers) by the World Bank and IMF was an acknowledgement that the poverty definition needed to be expanded further and that a larger part of the population should be involved in the politics of poverty reduction. Low-income countries were invited through a
‘participatory process’ to put forward plans on how to prioritize the use of government and external resources for social policies and for programs to promote growth and reduce poverty.
The first and second generation of PRSPs were not successful, neither as a participatory process, nor in putting forward genuine plans for poverty reduction. Since then new actors have entered the third generation and the implementation of PRSPs has become a research topic both within and outside the Bank.
If new and powerful influences on the direction of poverty research were to be ranked, the UNDP framework for human development and the operationalisation of indicators on the national level, would probably come in as a good number two (Human Development Reports 1990-2004). The Human Development Index (HDI, see http://www.hdr.undp.org/docs/statistics/indices/technote for precise construction of the indices) is a tool for the classification of poverty as a multi-complex phenomenon. The index was developed as an antidote to the reigning concept of economic poverty and incorporates indicators of life expectancy, knowledge, standard of living and social exclusion (HDI-2). The Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) incorporates also political and economic participation and power over economic resources. The HDIs are placed within the paradigm of human development and rank countries according to their fulfillment of the goals built into the indices. The new approach was welcomed both research-wise and politically. It fell into fertile soil. This was partly because the indices arrived at a time when poverty research in poor countries was still weak and they seemed simple to apply (although their database is still incomplete). Partly, because they appealed to the more radical part of the researchers who were dubious to the World Bank approach. Partly because they fitted into the thinking of donors and recipient partners alike as the indices ranked countries according to need. Partly, because they were closely followed up by national UNDP reports. As a result the UNDP discourse came to dominate research on poverty in poorer countries. One of the major authors behind the Human Development Reports became worried about the success and stressed that
the use of indicators in the HDI such as health and education did not provide a full understanding of the “broad and complex nature of human development”. While simplification was necessary poverty should be understood as including also human freedom and dignity in the capability framework of Amartya Sen (Fukuda-Parr 2001).
The introduction of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) provides another example of how a political decision turns a large amount of research expertise, organisational attention and financial resources into a new direction. The United Nations in 2000 unanimously adopted the Millennium Declaration with a set of quantified, time-bound goals for development in the South (and interestingly enough also in the North), to be achieved before 2015 (http://www.developmentgoals.org). Among the ambitious goals is to “eradicate extreme poverty and hunger” by halving the proportion of people whose income is less than
$1 a day (PPP) and halving the proportion of people who suffer from hunger. Poverty and hunger are operationalised, the first through economic and consumption measures, the latter through indicators for weight and dietary consumption. Note the discrepancy between the term ‘eradication’ and the proposal of a fifty percent decrease in poverty. The other indicators of the MDGs relate also to individual needs such as primary education, employment, participation, child mortality, maternal health and access to safe water. The last of the 8 major goals is somewhat out of tune with the rest. It is to “Develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system”. In spite of encouraging reports from the World Bank and UNDP (http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/reports/index.htm) the prospect of reaching the goals before 2015 is doubtful. Pogge challenges the Bank prognosis with population data and argues that even if the goal of halving the proportion of people whose income is less than a $1 a day by 2015 is reached, it will be due to demographic changes (2004). The aggregate data presented by the World Bank are also questioned (Besley and Burgess, 2003). While a poverty definition of 1$ a day is more manageable than more complex indicators, it is neither a valid nor a reliable measure of poverty. Even in the poorest countries an increase of an individual income to a dollar a day does little or nothing to poverty reduction, not to say eradication.
Gender as a research issue is another example of the impact of external forces on the poverty research agenda. When discrimination of women and girls in almost all walks of life first entered the radical women’s movements in the North and later the political arena in the South, gender research increased. Gender became one of the major variables to be taken into account in all kinds of poverty research and politically correct documents. While the other examples mentioned above came as a top-down approach, gender came as a bottom-up approach.
In the following a few examples of other current research approaches are added to further demonstrate the diversification in the understanding of poverty. They can be considered only singular bricks in the complicated jigsaw puzzle of an unfinished picture of poverty and poverty reducing measures. Each and every one deserves the same in-depth presentation as is done of the 6 topics in Chapters IV-IX.
Who are the poor/how do they behave: The major part of the research literature on poverty is about poor people. Their living conditions are described in detail, including particulars on medical status, nutrition, economic situation, family life, education, network, criminal activity, relation to public institutions, physical environment, race and ethnic affiliation, victimisation, cultural setting, moral behaviour, coping strategies, consumption patterns etc. The mass of information is based mainly on limited geographical studies from which a more universal picture of living conditions of poor people in the South is teased out
and presented in more generalised terms, as for example life in the slum, generational poverty, transfer of epidemics, migration patterns, etc. The strong focus on the poor and their livelihoods in the early years of poverty research fits well with the notion that causes of poverty are to be found among the poor and poverty reducing measures need to be targeted.
Basic and extended needs: A large literature discusses issues such as what minimum of needs a human being must have in order to survive physically; if a hierarchy of needs can be established (Maslow, 1970); the physiological needs as compared to psychological and social needs; the extent of needs for functioning in a society; and relative individual needs in relation to the surrounding society. Much of the discussion has been linked to discussions on how much aid a society needs to provide for its citizens. Doyal and Gough (1991) set the subject in a global perspective and discuss what kind of moral, political and economic institutions are required to efficiently meet the needs of the poorest part of the world’s population. One of the recommendations is for a global authority with the right to enforce need satisfaction. The answer is of relevance to current human rights discussions.
Human capital: The emphasis on improving the economic situation of the individual poor points in two major directions: the failure of the labour market to incorporate the poor in the labour force (including the need for economic growth to expand the labour market) and the need for investments in human capital to better synchronize the labour force and the labour market. Primary education and primary health care have become two of the pillars to build on, supplied with vocational training, and a major part of foreign aid is turned in that direction. Poverty research has followed this development. It includes studies of the efficiency of different kinds of human capital leading to employment and participation in society, processes of inclusion and marginalisation of the poor, institutionalisation of human capital formation, etc. The American ‘war on poverty’ in the 60es was initiated within this framework. In one of the major research programmes (the New Jersey experiments) different incentives and investments in human capital of poor ethnic groups were tried out to measure the impact on the willingness and capabilities of poor people to enter the labour market (Møller Pedersen, 1981), and for poor children to enter school. The research focus was on the poor and not on the surrounding society. As it turned out, the non-poor society was not ready for integration of the poor in spite of their new skills and increased human capital (Moynihan, 1968).
Access to resources: With new definitions of poverty come new areas of research to explore the consequences of poverty formation. When poverty became defined as deprivation of a combination of several resources besides economic resources, there followed the need to understand what kind of other resources had an impact on poverty reduction. Including the extent of resources needed to move out of poverty and how such resources could be accessed.
The Scandinavian level of living studies based on the early work of Titmuss (1950; 1964; see Chapter IX)) were pioneering. Studies on basic needs were revised and extended, dimensions from works on human capital were added, as were dimensions of peoples’ life spent outside the labour market. Dimensions from what was later renamed social capital were included.
(Johansson, 1970;Allardt, 1975; NOU 1976:28). Information on everyday life in Scandinavia became public property through the national Bureaus of statistics that took over the collection of the level-of-living data. Through this process deprivation of certain groups became visible and the push for social policies to close the access gaps expanded. Scandinavian bureaus of statistics (and Norwegian FAFO) have continued this kind of data collecting in countries in the South. Databases on level-of-living indicators are organised and adjusted to regional cultures and needs.
Social policies: A major part of poverty research takes place under terms like social policy research, research on interventions and safety nets, and evaluation research. Some of
this research is directed towards the poor, depending on the definition of poverty chosen.
With increasing growth in local and national poverty reducing activities has come a wave of research focusing on the adequacy of programmes for poverty reduction. In focus is costing and output, best practices, sustainability and institutionalisation, the political climate before and after the implementation of the programme, followed by methodological discussions on evaluation and measurements. The international agenda for poverty reduction in the South has produced an array of programmes financed by foreign aid that stimulate further this kind of research.
Gender/elderly/children/disabled/minorities/indigenous peoples: All through the time when mass poverty has reigned, specific groups have been singled out as particularly deprived and therefore needing more attention and aid than other poor groups. At times it is the poorest of the poor who are targeted by policies. At other times certain interest groups have managed to make the groups they defend stand out as morally deserving of special treatment. Whenever special groups have been singled out for attention researchers have followed up with studies bringing in more information. Or the other way around - when research has made a group more visible it increases the probability that measures targeting this special group will be introduced. A major part of present poverty research is so specialised in studies of specific groups of deprived people that each research field takes on the character of a sub-discipline.
Social capital: The notion of social capital is fairly recent (whether to give credit to Coleman (1988) or Putnam (1993)), although the content of the term is and has always been an integral part of sociology. Social capital has been hailed as a new tool for poverty reduction. It is a relational variable, and in its simplest form it can be said that an individual acquires social capital through participating in informal networks, registered organised associations of diffeent kinds and social movements. Social capital is the outcome and sum of these experiences. (For a more sophisticated presentation see Woolcock (2002)). The introduction of social capital can be seen as a response to a definition of poverty as a function of exclusion and lack of power to influence own life situation. However, if the social capital of poor people is to increase significantly it presupposes either institutional innovation or that poor people are allowed entry also to the networks of non-poor people. There is no empirical evidence that the latter is the case (Øyen, 2002).
Globalisation/globalised actors: Causes of poverty and strategies proposed for poverty reduction are becoming increasingly global. Material and immaterial interaction between North and South, between nations, between formal and informal groups, may all have an impact on poverty formation, the extent of which is not known. So far much of the research is theoretical. Empirical studies are limited, not in quantity but in extent due to frameworks that can not integrate the mass of relevant variables. Theories on the consequences of a changing world economy are in the foreground. The the impact of elements such as trade restrictions, export of natural resources, import of manufactured goods, national protectionism, subsidies and import taxes, employment and use of cheap labour, migration, the role of international actors, transfer of capital etc. are interpreted as divergently as respectively major poverty reducing strategies and major poverty producing forces (Reinert, 2004). Global medical research has been less disputed. Although controversial in some of its methods, it has been seen mainly as a social good also for poor people.
Key words like the role of the state, democracy, good governance, security, post- colonialism, debt relief, foreign aid, economic growth, pro-poor growth, capitalism, social costs, justice, inequality, underclass, discrimination, empowerment, environment, peace building, partnership, social responsibility, non-governmental organisations, mass movements, capabilities, participatory budgeting, and many, many more are part of the current debate about what poverty is and how poverty reduction can be tackled.
Researchers working within some of these approaches are now forming their own schools, networks, associations, newsletters etc. around their specific approach. The outcome of all this activity for poverty research and mass poverty reduction is difficult to judge at present.
4. Institutions Involved in Poverty Studies
Appendix A provides an overview of a whole range of institutions that in one way or the other have an impact on poverty research in the South. Some of the institutions produce the kind of poverty research that today is up front and set the standards for poverty understanding internationally. Others make use of poverty research results and spread them throughout political channels to turn them into interventional programmes to reduce poverty.
Some institutions mix the two approaches and term them applied poverty research. Still other institutions work within development paradigms as an indirect approach to poverty research and poverty reduction. While some are teaching departments with students writing their theses as contributions to poverty research.
As mentioned in the introduction to the list of institutions presented (Appendix A), the list is heterogeneous and incomplete. Only an imperfect and superficial analysis of the goals, contents and extent of actual poverty research of the many institutions has been performed, based on the institutions own presentations on the Internet. A more thorough investigation including a review of actual research output would result in a different list. Still, the list is useful in the sense that it is an indicator of the variety of approaches to poverty and the interest that poverty generates among scholars world-wide. It is also a useful list from which to orient oneself when seeking partners for collaborative and comparative research on poverty. Many of the institutions publish their own newsletter and/or series of papers, and some have their own journals or book series. The sum of all this information is enormous. The tendency is that research results from the North are more visible and accessible, through databases, libraries, bookshops and the dominant course of events where scholars in the North cite research produced in the North.
References
Allardt, Erik (1975) Att ha, att älska, att vara: om välfärd i Norden, Lund: Argos.
Andersen, Hans Petter (2005) In proceedings from the international workshop ’Micronutrients in South and South East Asia’, Kathmandu, Nepal, 8-10 September 2004. Publication forthcoming 2005, by ICIMOD, Kathmanda, Nepal.
Asian Development Bank (2000) The new social policy in Asia. Proceedings of the Manila Social Forum. Manila: Asian Development Bank (ADB).
Banik, Dan (2002) Democracy, drought and starvation in India: Testing Sen in theory and practice, Department of Political Science, University of Oslo.
Beasley, Timothy and Robin Burgess (2003) ”Halving global poverty”, in Journal of Economic Perspectives, and online http://econ.lse.ac.uk/staff/rburgess/wp/jep11.pdf Chambers, Robert (1997) Whose reality counts? Putting the first last, London: Intermediate
Technology Publications.
Cimadamore, Alberto, Hartley Dean and Jorge Siqueira (eds.), The Role of the state in poverty reduction in Latin America, CLACSO-CROP, Buenos Aires, forthcoming April 2005.
Coleman, James (1988) “Social capital in the creation of human capital”, American Journal of Sociology, 94: pp. 95-120.
Doyal, Len and Ian Gough (1991) A theory of human need, London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Drèze, Jean and Amartya Sen (1989) Hunger and public action, Oxford: Clarendon Press.